Publication Title

Stetson Law Review

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1-1-2011

Abstract

When facing a question that the law does not clearly answer, courts are generally obligated to resolve legal disputes by examining, interpreting, and applying prior positive law such as text and precedent. This Article argues that three cases decided by the Roberts Court – Gonzales v. Carhart, District of Columbia v. Heller, and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission – exemplify the Supreme Court’s propensity for disregarding prior positive law when deciding cases. The Author contends that the Roberts Court, quite possibly like all the Supreme Courts before it, is not a “court” at all because it does not take prior law seriously and does not transparently provide true justifications for its conclusions.

Comments

External Links
Westlaw
Lexis Advance
SSRN

Recommended Citation

Eric J. Segall, Is the Roberts Court Really a Court?, 40 Stetson L. Rev. 701 (2011).

Volume

40

Issue

3

First Page

701

Last Page

716

Download

Share

COinS